Genetic services are addressed by many large health plans. Challenges remain in ensuring consistency and currency of payer policy for genetic tests.

No abstract

PurposeTo provide practice recommendations for genetic counselors whose clients are considering cystic fibrosis (CF) carrier testing or seeking information regarding CF molecular test results. The goals of these recommendations are to: 1) Provide updated information about the natural history, diagnosis, and treatment of CF and related conditions. 2) Supplement genetic counselors’ knowledge and understanding of the available carrier screening and diagnostic testing options. 3) Describe the current state of genotype/phenotype correlations for CFTR mutations and an approach to interpreting both novel and previously described variants. 4) Provide a framework for genetic counselors to assist clients’ decision‐making regarding CF carrier testing, prenatal diagnosis, and pregnancy management.Disclaimer The practice guidelines of the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) are developed by members of the NSGC to assist genetic counselors and other health care providers in making decisions about appropriate management of genetic concerns; including access to and/or delivery of services. Each practice guideline focuses on a clinical or practice‐based issue, and is the result of a review and analysis of current professional literature believed to be reliable. As such, information and recommendations within the NSGC practice guidelines reflect the current scientific and clinical knowledge at the time of publication, are only current as of their publication date, and are subject to change without notice as advances emerge.In addition, variations in practice, which take into account the needs of the individual patient and the resources and limitations unique to the institution or type of practice, may warrant approaches, treatments and/or procedures that differ from the recommendations outlined in this guideline. Therefore, these recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does the use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. Genetic counseling practice guidelines are never intended to displace a health care provider's best medical judgment based on the clinical circumstances of a particular patient or patient population.Practice guidelines are published by NSGC for educational and informational purposes only, and NSGC does not “approve” or “endorse” any specific methods, practices, or sources of information.

For over a decade, prenatal screening for cystic fibrosis (CF) has been considered a model for the integration of genetic testing into routine medical practice. Data from pilot studies and public policy discourse have led to recommendations by some professional organizations that CF screening should be offered or made available to pregnant women and their partners, and to couples planning a pregnancy. It is crucial that genetic counselors gain thorough understanding of the complexities of CF and the implications of positive test results, so that they may serve as a reliable, educated referral base and resource for health care providers and their patients. While not all pregnant women will be referred for genetic counseling prior to CF carrier testing, genetic counselors often will be asked to counsel clients after they have a positive test result, or who are found to be at increased risk. Genetic counselors can play an important role in providing accurate and current information as well as support for patients' informed decisions. These recommendations were created by a multicenter working group of genetic counselors with expertise in CF and are based on personal clinical experience, review of pertinent English language medical articles, and reports of expert committees. The recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does the use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. These recommendations do not displace a health care provider's professional judgment based on the clinical circumstances of a particular client.

HLA-B*5701 testing to provide risk stratification for abacavir hypersensitivity has the potential to reduce incidence of hypersensitivity reactions in susceptible individuals. Early experience with clinical HLA-B*5701 testing of the first 100 specimens, from a large clinical reference laboratory in the United States, is presented. Patient samples were tested using a two-step approach. The first step allowed rapid identification of most HLA-B*5701-negative samples in a high throughput mode. The second step involved resolution of putative positives by DNA sequencing to identify B*5701 specifically as well as other B57 subtypes. Test reporting included a phone call from a genetic counselor to obtain the ethnic background and indication for testing and to provide a patient-specific interpretation. The patients population was comprised of Caucasians, 84%; Hispanics, 13%; and African Americans, 3%. Among the 100 samples tested, 92% were HLA-B*5701-negative and 8% were positive for the HLA-B*5701 allele. All HLA-B*5701 allele positives were identified in Caucasian patients. Where the indication for testing was obtainable (57 patients), pre-abacavir therapy screening was the indication 67% of the time. Clarification of previous suspected history of hypersensitivity was the indication 33% of the time. Among samples tested to help clarify a previous history of hypersensitivity, 16/19 or 84% did not carry the HLA-B*5701 allele whereas 3/19 (16%) were carriers of the HLA-B*5701 allele. Early utilization of HLA-B*5701 testing in community practice was not always consistent with the clinical indications for testing. Post-test communication assisted in providing physician education and interpretation of patient-specific results.